About your Search

20130201
20130201
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the senate majority leader, harry reid attacked it on tuesday. >> everyone has to look at the source where it comes from. a source that has brought up a lot of non-issues. i've told you how i feel about the source of this stuff. and it's really, very very typical for the source. >> bill: now, all fair minded americans will presume that senator menendez is innocent until proven guilty of any allegations, but in general, exploiting children is the worst possible scenario for any politician, and the evidence shows that he did not disclose about the jet trips, but that's a trifle compared to the under age always. they held it back for some time. but now, the story has advanced far beyond the rumor stage, and as an american, i hope that he had nothing to do with exploiting children, i hope. fox's news hour with laura ingram, and how do you read this. >> well, if the allegations are true, he's going to have to step down. >> bill: he'll go to prison. >> yes, we're talking about politics for a moment. and harry reid, i understand that he wants to write off anything that the daily caller is saying,
, we're talking about politics for a moment. and harry reid, i understand that he wants to write off anything that the daily caller is saying, and they backed off everything said for the day, but basically, they're punching on anything said before senator menendez. when you're a public official and elected, six, seven weeks ago by the people of your state to represent them, you have to hold yourself out as someone worthy of the trust of the public. and the late payments for the jet trips not withstanding, he violated senate ethics rules by not reporting those as significant gifts, and that in and of itself is serious. >> bill: he took the trips in august of 2010, and reimbursed the government in january of 2013, after the daily caller exposed the story. >> what it reminds me of a little bit is what happened with the john edwards story. of course one publication, the national enquirer was covering it, and pretty much every stayed away from it, and poo pooed it, and a significant time later, the national inquirer was right and they had done good reporting. i don't know the background o
for him. and i think democrats are very gleeful. if they dance jigs, i think harry reid is dancing one. he was the one candidate who could win that seat. he was running even or slightly ahead of markey. and while i think he was not as strong as he was going to be, he was when he first won. if the mood got a little bit bad on president obama, he could have won it again. he's smart to be running for governor. a, he would have had to run over and over again. and d, republicans do much better. the last republican win was senator ed brook way back in 1972. so i think it's good for democrats and probably good for scott brown. >> now the republicans felt they had a shot with brown. and i remember when they were killing susan rice unfairly in my opinion. the thought was they really were after susan rice because they wanted john kerry and so that kerry could -- the seat would go to scott brown or republican. now brown is out, they don't have a clear shot at the seat. this has to help president obama. scott brown not running is a big win for the president if the republicans can't come up with a comp
, right? senator harry reid and the democrats in the senate can make folks like blunt have to vote on gun control. they can make them have to vote on universal background checks. that gets harder in the house, although once the senate does pass something, if it does pass something, it is it get hard for the house to simply ignore it. so more so i think than even president obama's national speeches can force attention on this so they can, the way they're actually going to make -- the way that democrats can actually make republicans have to make a yes or no decision on gun control itself is to bring it to the floor of the senate and force them to actually vote yes or no. >> let's take a look at the money in the background of all of this. your colleague, chris solicited how the nra spent $32 million in the 2012 campaign and only spent $1 million in direct contributions, spent $25 million on outside spending, which includes political campaign ads. and the remaining $6 million on federal lobbying. can gun control lobbists like the former congresswoman, gabby giffords and her husband, started t
was what harry reid is incapable of doing, making something pass out of the senate that actually counts. we just keep getting deeper and deeper in debt. it's the most disappointing thing in my life. >> what's going on in washington? nothing. >> the whole idea of putting political capital together is to spend it down. >> you are about as cynical as i am about what's going on in washington, d.c.? you really don't think they're capable of doing two things at once. >> not these people. >> how does it look to the average person? it's almost like the government is in permanent divorce court. ♪ >> would you consider possibly being future senator barney frank? >> oh. >> i told the governor that i would not like frankly to do that. >> i spent a career carrying m-16 or m-4 carbine, i personally don't think there's any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets. >> problem solver, committed to fix, not fight. >> not fight. >> it's all attitude, man. it's all attitude. ♪ >> i said see you at thanksgiving dinner, my dad e-mailed me, he was worried you were coming. >> i actually contemplated comin
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)